|
Poster:
|
guyzilla |
Date:
|
December 02, 2010 01:45:12am |
|
Forum:
|
feature_films
|
Subject:
|
Academic question |
As I understand it, for a copyright notice to be valid, it must contain:
1. a copyright symbol or the word "copyright"
2. year of release
3. name of owner
My question is, do those items have to be in that order for it to be valid? I heard that they did from someone, so I'd like to know if it's true.
|
Poster:
|
Elric_Dewisant |
Date:
|
December 02, 2010 05:44:29am |
|
Forum:
|
feature_films
|
Subject:
|
Re: Academic question |
That sounds more like a question of usage than one of copyright law. As far as law goes, I would imagine that as long as all three conditions were met and present, concurrently, formatting of the actual copyright statement would be pretty much irrelevant, except for correct usage. Given that the copyright symbol (©) is just a shorthand for the word, as long as it was used correctly in a sentence (and we read copyright notices exactly as thought they were sentences), then grammatically, if not legally, things should be just fine.
Having said that, I can probably find, at the very least, a few books in my library where a copyright statement of some kind could be formatted thus:
© Your N. Amehere, 2010.
And of course, all of my style guides say nothing on proper use of the copyright symbol.
This post was modified by Elric_Dewisant on 2010-12-02 13:44:29
|
Poster:
|
Mystic550 |
Date:
|
December 02, 2010 04:00:40pm |
|
Forum:
|
feature_films
|
Subject:
|
Re: Academic question |
I haven't found anything that shows they have to be in certain order but they have to be together.
This is the law in effect for films before 1978.
http://www.loc.gov/cgi-bin/formprocessor/copyright/cfr.pl?&;urlmiddle=1.0.2.6.2.0.173.2∂=202§ion=2&prev=1&next=3
Remove the semi colon before urlmiddle
TVNews
OpenLibrary